diff options
| author | alicexbt <alicexbt@protonmail.com> | 2022-07-10 14:17:36 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2022-07-10 14:17:49 +0000 |
| commit | 94c5278c1da7e282cb9c24624ead7b6180acf272 (patch) | |
| tree | 4dc2ce3fe9f401492204dbce171b1500b1ff32e1 | |
| parent | 8e9eae0db7086f0cbed260301a0bf5d403279560 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-94c5278c1da7e282cb9c24624ead7b6180acf272.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-94c5278c1da7e282cb9c24624ead7b6180acf272.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Surprisingly, Tail Emission Is Not Inflationary
| -rw-r--r-- | 22/7655206412c90d2f4cdc99f65fdb31090ee85b | 164 |
1 files changed, 164 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/22/7655206412c90d2f4cdc99f65fdb31090ee85b b/22/7655206412c90d2f4cdc99f65fdb31090ee85b new file mode 100644 index 000000000..b484ccb65 --- /dev/null +++ b/22/7655206412c90d2f4cdc99f65fdb31090ee85b @@ -0,0 +1,164 @@ +Return-Path: <alicexbt@protonmail.com> +Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::137]) + by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E521FC002D + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Sun, 10 Jul 2022 14:17:49 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3424409D0 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Sun, 10 Jul 2022 14:17:49 +0000 (UTC) +DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org B3424409D0 +Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; + dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com header.i=@protonmail.com + header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=protonmail3 header.b=mjnWXBPY +X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -2.101 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, + DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, + SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] + autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no +Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id R7K0kOyhZj3R + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Sun, 10 Jul 2022 14:17:47 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 +DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 1EF7E40984 +Received: from mail-4325.protonmail.ch (mail-4325.protonmail.ch [185.70.43.25]) + by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1EF7E40984 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Sun, 10 Jul 2022 14:17:46 +0000 (UTC) +Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2022 14:17:36 +0000 +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; + s=protonmail3; t=1657462664; x=1657721864; + bh=CvlyPFheh5ZeCZrvGMiJhu4fhYW8Qu0D43AK4gJiH/Q=; + h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To: + References:Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To: + Feedback-ID:Message-ID; + b=mjnWXBPYwniOar1EnoDJT9k3aBcqoSvhLtt3M73erh9x0vhatrZVAntu/r5Ma6y+W + cFRPtxv/fstyLnN7FHu6KvJIo075V8FUakpEGex5CLqKSpEZRiswVSH20YhobPYrdQ + VccpPQFfddjAW0tFxan+K+7Zr8lN2ylVIha1lz4uiOrxwSoNTKtsLpijGNtmNT5tQv + flTC0VPT82v0PDG3qAlIer/EVIk/Z41XHyzgxkvKl8ggrAa+gfkUzoUa5BqsO2dT2s + BY7wp8CWM6qQtX49c2TqPkRyFH5fhM8xDTeN2kzZWnY+3x4FLtRcnekOtJdfoyjH8H + 2ffUBMx3YnUdQ== +To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> +From: alicexbt <alicexbt@protonmail.com> +Reply-To: alicexbt <alicexbt@protonmail.com> +Message-ID: <eFdBAPulC6BoW5zBt30Mq4fXhnRzVENMjsfGrj1Yzbi-Z-wje21pCwEpMQ6Tc27m8LdhMN_66UX3Ze1BNAU9rsgqF-1JRV40s1QU9zSJ6js=@protonmail.com> +In-Reply-To: <6xuj-ljJ9hvME-TIgWHmfPpad4aJ-1zTYSH1NBuFL_gi-6hJHMayWLEAhcEyw_lqmkR24ee8uMIAH6n4TDguk_5fJ8och99Em3m5y1R6brE=@protonmail.com> +References: <D50AEC8C-4EEC-4C17-8626-87C651F1AA66@voskuil.org> + <6xuj-ljJ9hvME-TIgWHmfPpad4aJ-1zTYSH1NBuFL_gi-6hJHMayWLEAhcEyw_lqmkR24ee8uMIAH6n4TDguk_5fJ8och99Em3m5y1R6brE=@protonmail.com> +Feedback-ID: 40602938:user:proton +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 10 Jul 2022 14:23:57 +0000 +Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Surprisingly, Tail Emission Is Not Inflationary +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 +Precedence: list +List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2022 14:17:50 -0000 + +Hi ZmnSCPxj, + + +> Thus, we should instead prepare for a future where the block subsidy must= + be removed, possibly before the existing schedule removes it, in case a ma= +jority coalition of miner ever decides to censor particular transactions wi= +thout community consensus. +> Fortunately forcing the block subsidy to 0 is a softfork and thus easier = +to deploy. + +`consensus.nSubsidyHalvingInterval` for mainnet in [chainparams.cpp][1] can= + be decreased to 195000. This will reduce the number of halvings from 34 to= + 14 and subsidy will be 0 when it becomes less than 0.01 although not sure = +if this will be a soft fork. + +I doubt there will be consensus for it because all the [projections and pre= +dictability][2] about bitcoin(currency) would be affected by this change. M= +aybe everyone can agree with this change if most of the miners start being = +'compliant' like one of the coinjoin implementation. + +[1]: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/chainparams.cpp#L66 +[2]: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply + + +/dev/fd0 + +Sent with Proton Mail secure email. + +------- Original Message ------- +On Saturday, July 9th, 2022 at 9:59 PM, ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-d= +ev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: + + +> Good morning e, and list, +> +> > Yet you posted several links which made that specific correlation, to w= +hich I was responding. +> > +> > Math cannot prove how much coin is =E2=80=9Clost=E2=80=9D, and even if = +it was provable that the amount of coin lost converges to the amount produc= +ed, it is of no consequence - for the reasons I=E2=80=99ve already pointed = +out. The amount of market production has no impact on market price, just as= + it does not with any other good. +> > +> > The reason to object to perpetual issuance is the impact on censorship = +resistance, not on price. +> +> +> To clarify about censorship resistance and perpetual issuance ("tail emis= +sion"): +> +> * Suppose I have two blockchains, one with a constant block subsidy, and = +one which had a block subsidy but the block subsidy has become negligible o= +r zero. +> * Now consider a censoring miner. +> * If the miner rejects particular transactions (i.e. "censors") the miner= + loses out on the fees of those transactions. +> * Presumably, the miner does this because it gains other benefits from th= +e censorship, economically equal or better to the earnings lost. +> * If the blockchain had a block subsidy, then the loss the miner incurs i= +s small relative to the total earnings of each block. +> * If the blockchain had 0 block subsidy, then the loss the miner incurs i= +s large relative to the total earnings of each block. +> * Thus, in the latter situation, the external benefit the miner gains fro= +m the censorship has to be proportionately larger than in the first situati= +on. +> +> Basically, the block subsidy is a market distortion: the block subsidy er= +odes the value of held coins to pay for the security of coins being moved. +> But the block subsidy is still issued whether or not coins being moved ar= +e censored or not censored. +> Thus, there is no incentive, considering only the block subsidy, to not c= +ensor coin movements. +> Only per-transaction fees have an incentive to not censor coin movements. +> +> +> Thus, we should instead prepare for a future where the block subsidy must= + be removed, possibly before the existing schedule removes it, in case a ma= +jority coalition of miner ever decides to censor particular transactions wi= +thout community consensus. +> Fortunately forcing the block subsidy to 0 is a softfork and thus easier = +to deploy. +> +> +> Regards, +> ZmnSCPxj +> _______________________________________________ +> bitcoin-dev mailing list +> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev + |